Literature DB >> 19362654

The trouble with screening.

.   

Abstract

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19362654     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60701-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


× No keyword cloud information.
  6 in total

1.  Informed participation in cancer screening: the facts are changing, and GPs are going to feel it.

Authors:  Linn Getz; John Brodersen
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.581

Review 2.  Breast cancer screening: the questions answered.

Authors:  Philippe Autier; Laura J Esserman; Chris I Flowers; Nehmat Houssami
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Marginal public health gain of screening for colorectal cancer: modelling study, based on WHO and national databases in the Nordic countries.

Authors:  Johann A Sigurdsson; Linn Getz; Göran Sjönell; Paula Vainiomäki; John Brodersen
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2012-04-22       Impact factor: 2.431

4.  Awareness of ovarian cancer risk factors, beliefs and attitudes towards screening: baseline survey of 21,715 women participating in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening.

Authors:  L Fallowfield; A Fleissig; J Barrett; U Menon; I Jacobs; J Kilkerr; V Farewell
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-07-20       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Patient experience - the ingredient missing from cost-effectiveness calculations.

Authors:  David Curtis
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2011-05-30       Impact factor: 2.711

6.  Public acceptance and uptake of oesophageal adenocarcinoma screening strategies: A mixed-methods systematic review.

Authors:  Jasmijn Sijben; Yonne Peters; Kim van der Velden; Linda Rainey; Peter D Siersema; Mireille J M Broeders
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2022-04-04
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.